AtomChange

Intro

Values

Please read and contemplate on the core values our community is based on, before moving further:

Openness and full (even radical) transparency

Freedom to participate, to join or leave the community in any role

Ultimate power in the hands of the community members (token holders)

Efforts should bring benefit to all community members

Open dialog

All our activity and decisions supposed to be based on these five values.

Motivation and preface

Our aim is to create a decentralized community platform governed by the community.
First of all, community should be ultimate source of decisions regarding how platform functions.

In order to do this, community should be able to change also the rules how decisions are made in the community also.

In all existing decentralized systems, end users or community members are already in some sense decision makers in a way that they choose what platform to use, and, if no one uses the platform, it dies.

With the development of public blockchains, such events as forks came onto the scene.
Eventually, fork is an event, when some part of the community does not agrees with another part of the community and decides to go on their own way. In blockchain universe, such events can be easily handled.

We do not see forks as an issue. Diversity is pre-requirement for the freedom of choice, the basic human right.

Diversity creates problems only if there is an isolation. If there is free interaction between multiple platforms, open flow of ideas and values, diversity actually increases general well-being by offering more choice. Therefore there is a big need for open, decentralized mechanisms for cross-chain interaction.

Building blocks

There are several elements mentioned in the definition:

AtomChange Blockchain - is a Delegated Proof of Stake general-purpose public decentralized blockchain.

Open economic model, as a way to expand and enrich ecosystem.

Decentralized multiblockchain interaction and exchange platform, as a first application implemented on the platform.

AtomChange blockchain

Basic consensus

The version of the platform end users accessing depends on a which version signing nodes (full nodes) running.
But ultimately if the platform have too many nodes in brings a lot of issues related to speed and synchronization.

We believe that Delegated Proof of Stake system is the optimal solution, existing and tested so far today.

Delegated Proof of Stake means all tokenholders can vote and elect nodes who is in their turn, responsible for the running full nodes with proper version of the software.

In order to minimize risks of chain fork, we have to design such governance system that is highly flexible and provides maximum power directly to the end users. This is possible if there will be an instruments to change basic properties of the system on user voting event.

During the system launch, in the genesis block there will be 21 predefined nodes who will have the right to sign blocks.

Initially, for the each signed block, full node will be receiving 10 ATM tokens as a block reward.

All token holders can initiate voting to elect and assign new signing nodes, up to 108, or fire existing ones.

Consensus rules themselves implemented as a smart contract and all token holders can initiate voting for migration into new consensus contract.

Technical properties

AtomChange blockchain is based on ethereum fork as the most convenient general-purpose smart contract platform. However, we understand that its performance is very limited. One of the main development priorities will be improving platform performance: increasing block speed and increasing transaction capacity.

Open Economic Model

Open Economic Model designed in order optimize issuance mechanics of public economic networks and give the ability to deploy new non-profit (general welfare) and for-profit projects on top of already existing networks.

Problems with existing economic models

Fiat systems:

Not Transparent

Not controllable by public

Capable of doing some welfare efforts (government -> taxes -> social welfare projects), but often not very effective (corruption, bureaucracy, absence competition)

Established Blockchain Networks:

Transparent

Controllable by public (community)

Not set up for general-welfare projects (infective mining and emission algorithms)

No effective incentives to develop existing network

New Blockchain Networks set up through an ICO (Token Generation Events):

An ICO event essentially creates new separated community instead of expanding existing one

Unreasonable funding targets (projects trying to raise much more than they need in order to reach to next milestone)

No effective incentives to develop existing network

Hight risks and high percentage of scam projects

Desired properties

After analyzing the current landscape of solutions, we can form the list of desired properties for the new system:

Effective incentives to improve existing network

Milestone-based, iterative funding for new projects

Full transparency

Ultimate power in the hands of the community

Effective way to incorporate both non-proft (general welfare) and for-profit (commercial) projects into community economy

Emission model

If we take analogy to the known things, emission of new tokens is essentially equal to the all community members paying taxes.

Burning tokens (destroying existing ones) is similar to paying dividends to all existing token holders. When you extract some amount of tokens from the open market, this act will increase economic value of the remaining tokens.

Community have the ultimate power and emission (funding) events happen according to tokenholders voting. We call it community funding contract. In fact, community funding contract is not a direct issuing event, but it is a ‘license’ for the managers of the project to issue certain amount of tokens.

Community funding contracts can vary in properties.

Amount limits for the community funding contract can be:

Specified in ATM tokens

Specified in stable value equivalent, we use labour-hour rate as a most stable value (implemented through the pricefeed published by signing nodes)

In most cases there is no need to issue large amount of tokens at once. Most of the projects require regular ongoing funding. Therefore community funding contract can have multiple timeframe based limits - daily, monthly, yearly, lifetime, etc. Examples:

100 000 tokens total

100 labor-hour per month during the next 12 months

500 labor-hour per month, without end time specified (until community will revoke the contract)

Any community funding contract can be revoked on community voting. This is required to prevent further funding of failing projects, block compromised contracts or unscrupulous project managers.

Board of Guardians

Board of Guardians is group consisting from 3 to 12 community members elected by all tokenholders. The responsibility of the board is to approve any community community voting requests. This is required to avoid low quality, scam or malicious voting proposals. To qualify as a board of guardian candidate, candidate should be in the top 20% token holders.

Each member of the board receives ‘salary’, defined by a community via board-targeted community funding contract.

Voting rules

Each voting have 15 days voting time window. Voting is considered successful with any rate of participation.

Inactive addresses who did not participate in the voting are fined with 1% inactivity tax.

Voters, who voted against majority are fined with minority tax. This is required to discourage automatic (bot) voting.

It is expected, that not everyone will be able to follow up community voting requests. To do this properly, it will take time and expertise. Therefore, voting power of an account can be delegated to another account. We call such accounts community activists. If community activist votes against majority, minority tax applies proportionately to all his electorate.

An additional qualification tax applies to the community activist in case of minority voting.

Qualification tax = minority tax collected from electorate * 0.2

Community activist is allowed to vote only if he keeps at stake amount of tokens, sufficient to pay qualification tax in case of minority voting.

All applicable taxes does not redistribute tokens, but only burns them.

Community activist can set a fee, payable by his electorate on each voting.

Community voting requests

Declaration of Values

Community have declaration of values.

Projects wishing to submit community funding request, have to comply with the declaration.

AtomChange Exchange Platform

Intro

We believe blockchain ecosystem have a unavoidable need for multiblockchain interaction platforms in order to make a next step and the development of the industry.

At he moment there are tens of very advanced distributed blockchain platforms but there is no way to interact for them except through centralized platforms.

All the centralized exchanges bears full pack of respective risks and inconvenience connected with central point of attack and control.

Our goal is to make an open, easily extandable platform and standard for multiblockchain interaction. We do not want to work several years on something that will turn out impractical. We want to implement the system step by step in short milestones that would be usable by community by themselves.

Concept

AtomChange Blockchain should be DPoS blockchain.

First of all, DPoS blockchain leaves ultimate power in the hands of community.

And second, DPoS consensus model allows to have fast enough platform due to limited amount of supporting nodes.

Each signing node is elected by token holders and receives fixed ‘salary’ in form of tokens set up for the supporting nodes.

Blockchain keeps:

ATM balance and transaction records

Voting records

Governance rules

Reputation scores

Orderbook

Trade history with links to transactions on other chains.

Other custom and user-deployed smart contracts

Please check architecture for more details on the side of implementation.

Multiple validators can potentially participate in one swap (exchange operation) in order to reduce risks.

Picking up a validator

User can set up a minimal score for picking up a validator for each swap.

Score of particular validator for a specific order is calcualted dynamically:

FactualScore = ValidatorScore * (ValidatorStake/OrderSize)

Identity Management and Community Safety

Intro

Right now there is tension between two groups of thought.

First group believes that Government should be able to protect its citizens and have full instruments for it, like surveillance, capital control and identification instruments

Another group believes that personal freedom is utmost value and no government should be able to interfere or dictate what to say, what to consume, with whom to interact, what to do for individuals and organizations.

Both options poses risk of abuse.

In first case, governments can start abusing their powers and turn into dictatorships, or even worse, corrupt dictatorships.

In another case, certain individuals will start abusing their freedom in a way that is harmful to whole society.

We believe that society should find a golden mean with proper place of each element.

There is always be someone who will want complete freedom, but majority will prefer to bargain certain limitations in order to receive benefits of being a part of more safer community. And we believe that condition of the deal should be simple and transparent for both sides.

Upcoming technological trends radically increases legal and physical mobility and more people and organizations getting a choice which jurisdiction to choose. The process is inevitable and competition between governments for people and businesses will become more tense.

Solution

There are multiple identity management startups moving into decentralized identity field. Using open economic model incentives best solutions can be integrated on the platform.
Solution should fit following requirements:

Privacy on demand

Sharing of information is controlled by the owner of information

Multiple identity providers (verifiers) can exist

Governments can launch their own ‘communities’ with or without tokens, and provide their benefits only to those who are part of the community and follow specific set of rules (like providing information on transactions, transaction restrictions, counterparty verifications, etc).

Implications and Use Cases

Completely new, transparent, safe and iterative way of funding

Liquidity platform - with the growth of the community, more and more tokens will be added to the exchange platform.

Way to interact between blockchains on further steps of development

Smart wallets that keep desired portfolio composition

Trustless investment funds based on smart wallets infrastructure

Many projects incorporated into the same token infrastructure, way to mplement new project that is fully tied to the root tokens with new utility and the market, for example, Golem project, instead of issuing new token could tie its functionality directly to Ether.

Effective way to improve community infrastructure

End-user have a choice in which community to participate, by choosing which tokens to hold

Ability to up several foundations of independent groups of developers for the codebase improvements

Way to fund non-profit projects and participate in communities

Build roads and hospitals in the city or community

Direct competition of the governments to provide more attractive services

Links

Here are some other projects, moving into similar directions, where we can find some good ideas.

https://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-meets-zcash-developers-test-tool-trustless-trades/ - can be potentially used in the future.

https://www.coindesk.com/cross-blockchain-trades-lightning-gives-new-life-atomic-swaps/ - can be potentially used in the future.